With https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-June/msg02275.html, it looks like LSB init stuff is becoming pretty much a mandatory package for every setup. However, on a fairly minimal current F-7 system: $ sudo yum install redhat-lsb [...] ============================================================================= Package Arch Version Repository Size ============================================================================= Installing: redhat-lsb i386 3.1-14.fc7 fedora 21 k Installing for dependencies: at i386 3.1.10-11.fc7 fedora 55 k bc i386 1.06-26 fedora 107 k binutils i386 2.17.50.0.12-4 fedora 2.9 M cairo i386 1.4.4-1.fc7 fedora 500 k cups i386 1:1.2.10-10.fc7 fedora 2.9 M ed i386 0.5-1 fedora 57 k file i386 4.20-1.fc7 fedora 28 k file-libs i386 4.20-1.fc7 fedora 311 k gettext i386 0.16.1-8.fc7 fedora 1.5 M groff i386 1.18.1.4-2 fedora 1.9 M libXft i386 2.1.12-1.fc7 fedora 44 k libXi i386 1.0.4-1 fedora 29 k libXrender i386 0.9.2-1.fc7 fedora 27 k libXt i386 1.0.4-1.fc7 fedora 175 k libgomp i386 4.1.2-12 fedora 76 k libthai i386 0.1.7-5.fc7 fedora 154 k m4 i386 1.4.8-2.fc7 fedora 175 k man i386 1.6e-3.fc7 fedora 267 k pango i386 1.16.4-1.fc7 fedora 356 k paps i386 0.6.6-19.fc7 fedora 32 k pax i386 3.4-1.2.2 fedora 63 k time i386 1.7-29.fc7 fedora 24 k tmpwatch i386 2.9.11-1 fedora 19 k Transaction Summary ============================================================================= Install 24 Package(s) Update 0 Package(s) Remove 0 Package(s) That's a lot of unwanted dependencies. To fix this, how about splitting functionality related to LSB init scripts to a redhat-lsb-init subpackage, and having the main redhat-lsb package require it?
Adding FutureFeature keyword to RFE's.
I suppose the original threat did not occur after all, but redhat-lsb continues to pull in even more stuff in F-8 than it did in F-7, so perhaps the split would still be a good idea.
Created attachment 325142 [details] split desktop/printing into sub-packages First brutish attempt to jettison desktop specs into sub-packages.
This bug should block FedoraServerTracker bug.
Not having fine-grained LSB capabilities has blocked a customer from deploying software. Software that doesn't require X, but uses lsb_release and /lib/lsb/init-functions requires redhat-lsb. The customer attempted to install redhat-lsb and here is a portion of the response: Well, we have a strict policy here (as do many companies) of no X GUI on Linux servers, so that's not an option for us. Why in the world do the latest util package require me to install X-everything on my server? I guess I'll go with 1.2 for now instead of 1.2.1, and until this is resolved we won't be installing anything newer than 1.2.
I have the same concern. lsb_release needs to be in a smaller package that doesn't require all the libraries...
I see that the graphics and printing has been split out of the rehat-lsb package. Any news on if the lsb init stuff will be split out as well?
It looks like there are some missing scripts in the lsb packages. The /lib/lsb/init-functions script calls some scripts in /etc/redhat-lsb log_success_msg () { /etc/redhat-lsb/lsb_log_message success "$@" } log_failure_msg () { /etc/redhat-lsb/lsb_log_message failure "$@" } log_warning_msg () { /etc/redhat-lsb/lsb_log_message warning "$@" } These seem to be missing. Installing the Redhat-lsb packages to enable the dkms_autoinstaller init script to produce useful messages on failure also does not resolve the problem as it calls a function called 'log_action_end_msg' which does not seem to exist.
Please ignore the comment about the dkms_installer init script. It turns out that although it sources the /lib/lsb/init-functions it does not use it as I assumed/thought. The report about the missing files is still relevant though.
Sorry, please ignore the last two messages. They are both wrong. I seem to be confusing myself and polluting the bug.
Sub-packaging is already done in Fedora. Closing this old bug. If needed any additional fix please open a new bug.